Why Strings as Classes?

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Dee Girl" <deegirl at noreply.com> wrote in message 
news:g94oup$2mk7$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Christopher Wright Wrote:
>
>> Dee Girl wrote:
>> > I am confused to. Why is making [] do find good and making find do [] 
>> > wrong? How do you make decision? To me it looks the opposite way. 
>> > Because find is less demanding contract than []. In design a stronger 
>> > contract can replace a weaker contract. Not the inverse. Thank you, Dee 
>> > Girl
>>
>> Choosing the data structure used is never the job of the code you're
>> giving the data to.
>
> Yes. But code should refuse data if data does not respect an interface.
>
> I think binary_search never should work on list. It does really bad thing 
> when linear search is the correct thing. Do you think it should?
>
>> It's the job of whatever creates the data structure.
>> By giving two functions where the only difference is performance
>> guarantees, you're allowing the called code to determine what data
>> structures it accepts, not based on the operations the structure
>> supports, but based on the performance of those data structures.
>
> I do not think there is anything wrong. And for me performance and 
> complexity is very different words. Performance is like dmd -O -release 
> against dmd -debug. Or asm implementation of function. Complexity is very 
> different thing and essential for algorithm.
>

True. But, since performance (as you described it) is not particularly 
relevant to these discussions, some of us have been (perhaps incorrectly) 
using "performance" and "complexity" interchangably. We mean "complexity".